I feel like I underperformed my numbers this cycle- I have a 170 LSAT and a 3.65 GPA, as well as a year of work experience in the business sector. However, I was waitlisted from T6 to T14 with the exception of Michigan, which gave me $90k. I have already withdrawn from WUSTL and Vanderbilt, and am waiting to hear back on money from Texas. I applied in mid to late January, so a relatively late application may have had some negative impact on my cycle.
My career goals are to work in Big Law doing corporate work for as long as possible before lateraling to mid-law or to counsel in the business sector. I am from the rural Midwest, thus do not have significant ties anywhere (although, being within a 3 hr drive of Chicago, I could probably swing ties to Chicago). My SO has significant ties to Denver and both of Dallas/Houston. My preference would be Chicago Big Law > Texas Big Law > Other secondary market Big Law (Denver, Detroit, etc.) > LA/San Fran/DC Big Law > NYC Big Law (basically, I would like to avoid NYC if at all possible).
I have some financial means to lower my COA (working SO, small amount of interest-free loans from parents, small amount of personal savings), leaving me with a maximum COA of $150k, although it will likely be in the $130k to $140k range.
I have taken the LSAT twice, and the 170 was several points higher than my best PT, meaning I am doubtful I could improve upon the 170.
Basically, would Michigan at a maximum of $150k COA be justifiable?
Michigan ($$) vs. Re-Apply Forum
-
CTT
- Posts: 120
- Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 10:37 am
Re: Michigan ($$) vs. Re-Apply
I'm not sure you underperform your numbers if you go to Michigan with a $90,000 scholarship, though I agree it's odd you didn't get in anywhere else. Michigan was worth $150,000 to me. However, I think in evaluating the choice, a few additional factors are relevant:
First, are you K-JD? The risk of missing big law if you want it from Michigan is actually really low if you are not K-JD and have some sort of legit experience. Almost no one in my class who wanted big law and had taken two years or more to work in law, finance, business, politics, or teach ended up not getting big law. Point being: if your not K-JD, you should feel less pressure to take the time off.
Second, what's the opportunity cost? If you're making $40,000 a year, then delaying hopping on the $175,000, $195,000, $210,000 escalator is pretty expensive. If you're making $120,000 a year, then obviously it's less expensive.
Third, would you absolutely not want it go to NY if that was the only big law choice you had? There's probably a solid 25 percent of the class at Michigan for which, largely because of grades, the only $160,000 starting salary option is New York. New York firms have shown a willingness to higher people in the bottom quarter of the class (3.1X GPA); large firms elsewhere in the country are more hesitant to do that. But the thing is, this isn't different at the other schools you might get into next year. UofC would provide some added Chicago safety, but Northwestern won't.
First, are you K-JD? The risk of missing big law if you want it from Michigan is actually really low if you are not K-JD and have some sort of legit experience. Almost no one in my class who wanted big law and had taken two years or more to work in law, finance, business, politics, or teach ended up not getting big law. Point being: if your not K-JD, you should feel less pressure to take the time off.
Second, what's the opportunity cost? If you're making $40,000 a year, then delaying hopping on the $175,000, $195,000, $210,000 escalator is pretty expensive. If you're making $120,000 a year, then obviously it's less expensive.
Third, would you absolutely not want it go to NY if that was the only big law choice you had? There's probably a solid 25 percent of the class at Michigan for which, largely because of grades, the only $160,000 starting salary option is New York. New York firms have shown a willingness to higher people in the bottom quarter of the class (3.1X GPA); large firms elsewhere in the country are more hesitant to do that. But the thing is, this isn't different at the other schools you might get into next year. UofC would provide some added Chicago safety, but Northwestern won't.
-
jewkidontheblock
- Posts: 246
- Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 3:06 pm
Re: Michigan ($$) vs. Re-Apply
My stats are very similar to yours, with the main difference being that I applied everywhere in early-mid September. You might be on to something about the timeline, as I was only waitlisted at Penn from the T6-14 and was admitted everywhere else.
Still, Michigan with $$ is still looking like my best option and it's very likely I end up taking it. Though this is all anecdotal, you should take a hard look at each of the other schools you would consider. Try to figure out if any of them would realistically wind up a significantly better option than Michigan, such that it would warrant waiting a year.
In your shoes, the only scenario I would see myself waiting a cycle for is ED to Northwestern. Given your goal to work in Chicago, it's probably the best option if you're okay with making the commitment. People with your numbers have been getting it fairly consistently the past few cycles.
Still, Michigan with $$ is still looking like my best option and it's very likely I end up taking it. Though this is all anecdotal, you should take a hard look at each of the other schools you would consider. Try to figure out if any of them would realistically wind up a significantly better option than Michigan, such that it would warrant waiting a year.
In your shoes, the only scenario I would see myself waiting a cycle for is ED to Northwestern. Given your goal to work in Chicago, it's probably the best option if you're okay with making the commitment. People with your numbers have been getting it fairly consistently the past few cycles.
